Update from the Annual Meeting
By now, I am sure that many of you are aware that we did not affirm new Elders, Deacons, or a Treasurer at the most recent Annual Meeting held in May. In order to give us time to adequately evaluate and respond to several questions regarding our by-laws, we have decided to postpone those affirmations until September. Our existing Elders, Deacons, and Treasurer will continue to serve until then. In the interim, the Elders are working on addressing four questions relating to our bylaws. I spoke to these issues during the annual meeting, and would like to summarize them in this week’s Elder blog update.
The four issues which the Elders are addressing are:
1) Nominating Task Force (Contacting Nominees) – Is the Nominating Task Force required to contact all nominees to determine if they are interested in going through the nominating process?
2) Nominating Task Force (Conflict of Interest) – Is it a conflict of interest that a member of the Nominating Task Force be nominated for Elder, Deacon or Treasurer while serving on the Nominating Task Force?
3) Elder Term Limits – Should we implement a defined length of service for Elders?
4) Elder Affirmation Process – Should we change the current method of group affirmation of Elders by oral member vote?
I would now like to address each of these issues in more detail:
1) Nominating Task Force (Process to Contact Nominees) – The primary question being looked at is related to Article VI Section 6 of our bylaws:
“Those proposed will be informed, have time for personal evaluation, and then choose whether or not to be interviewed by the Nominating Task Force.”
The question we are addressing is do our bylaws require the Nominating Task Force to contact all persons nominated? After consulting with previous Elders, who drafted the bylaws, we learned that the initial intention of the bylaws was that the Nominating Task Force would have the discretion to decide who to contact in regards to going through the process.
However, we are aware that some members of the Congregation have interpreted the bylaws differently. In response to this, and to be sensitive to these members, we have commissioned a new Nominating Task Force to contact all those people who were nominated, but not contacted by the original Nominating Task Force.
2) Nominating Task Force (Conflict of Interest) – Another question that has been raised is a possible conflict of interest to have a member of the Nominating Task Force be actively going through the process as a nominee for Elder, Deacon or Treasurer?
Let me begin by stating that on this issue, our current bylaws are very clear, and that is that there is nothing that prevents a member of the Nominating Task Force from going through the process. Since the Nominating Task Force is not looking for a specific numbers of Elder or Deacon candidates, rather all qualified individuals, this is not seen as a conflict of interest.
However, the Elders have heard from several members who have expressed concern that there was the appearance of a conflict of interest. We have since received proposals for amendments to our bylaws in regard to this question and these proposals are being evaluated by the Elders.
3) Elder Term Limits – The issue of Elder term limits was initially raised at the 2006 Annual Meeting. Just prior to the 2007 Annual Meeting, we received several different proposals in regards to this issue.
Currently, Elders serve one year terms that are renewed annually. There is currently no time limit to the number of years in which an Elder can serve.
One question that has been raised is should we install a maximum period that an Elder can serve before taking a mandatory sabbatical. Conversely, we are also evaluating a suggestion that there is no biblical basis for imposing time limits on Elders.
4) Elder Affirmation Procedure – The final question which the Elders are addressing, and for which we have also received bylaws recommendations, is in relation to our method for affirming Elders. Currently, our Elders are affirmed collectively by voice vote at the Annual Meeting.
We have received input and are evaluating a new process which would allow for an anonymous, paper vote, that would allow for individual Elder, Deacon and Treasurer affirmation.
As the Elders address these issues, we are still inviting input from all of you. Bill Coggan will be leading meetings designed to solicit additional input on these issues. Check the announcements, enews, and the Sunday bulletins for more details on the dates and times of these meetings. We also invite you to call or email any of us with your thoughts or comments on these or any other issues that God has laid upon your heart.
We appreciate your thoughts and prayers.
Mike Denci (for the Elders)
The four issues which the Elders are addressing are:
1) Nominating Task Force (Contacting Nominees) – Is the Nominating Task Force required to contact all nominees to determine if they are interested in going through the nominating process?
2) Nominating Task Force (Conflict of Interest) – Is it a conflict of interest that a member of the Nominating Task Force be nominated for Elder, Deacon or Treasurer while serving on the Nominating Task Force?
3) Elder Term Limits – Should we implement a defined length of service for Elders?
4) Elder Affirmation Process – Should we change the current method of group affirmation of Elders by oral member vote?
I would now like to address each of these issues in more detail:
1) Nominating Task Force (Process to Contact Nominees) – The primary question being looked at is related to Article VI Section 6 of our bylaws:
“Those proposed will be informed, have time for personal evaluation, and then choose whether or not to be interviewed by the Nominating Task Force.”
The question we are addressing is do our bylaws require the Nominating Task Force to contact all persons nominated? After consulting with previous Elders, who drafted the bylaws, we learned that the initial intention of the bylaws was that the Nominating Task Force would have the discretion to decide who to contact in regards to going through the process.
However, we are aware that some members of the Congregation have interpreted the bylaws differently. In response to this, and to be sensitive to these members, we have commissioned a new Nominating Task Force to contact all those people who were nominated, but not contacted by the original Nominating Task Force.
2) Nominating Task Force (Conflict of Interest) – Another question that has been raised is a possible conflict of interest to have a member of the Nominating Task Force be actively going through the process as a nominee for Elder, Deacon or Treasurer?
Let me begin by stating that on this issue, our current bylaws are very clear, and that is that there is nothing that prevents a member of the Nominating Task Force from going through the process. Since the Nominating Task Force is not looking for a specific numbers of Elder or Deacon candidates, rather all qualified individuals, this is not seen as a conflict of interest.
However, the Elders have heard from several members who have expressed concern that there was the appearance of a conflict of interest. We have since received proposals for amendments to our bylaws in regard to this question and these proposals are being evaluated by the Elders.
3) Elder Term Limits – The issue of Elder term limits was initially raised at the 2006 Annual Meeting. Just prior to the 2007 Annual Meeting, we received several different proposals in regards to this issue.
Currently, Elders serve one year terms that are renewed annually. There is currently no time limit to the number of years in which an Elder can serve.
One question that has been raised is should we install a maximum period that an Elder can serve before taking a mandatory sabbatical. Conversely, we are also evaluating a suggestion that there is no biblical basis for imposing time limits on Elders.
4) Elder Affirmation Procedure – The final question which the Elders are addressing, and for which we have also received bylaws recommendations, is in relation to our method for affirming Elders. Currently, our Elders are affirmed collectively by voice vote at the Annual Meeting.
We have received input and are evaluating a new process which would allow for an anonymous, paper vote, that would allow for individual Elder, Deacon and Treasurer affirmation.
As the Elders address these issues, we are still inviting input from all of you. Bill Coggan will be leading meetings designed to solicit additional input on these issues. Check the announcements, enews, and the Sunday bulletins for more details on the dates and times of these meetings. We also invite you to call or email any of us with your thoughts or comments on these or any other issues that God has laid upon your heart.
We appreciate your thoughts and prayers.
Mike Denci (for the Elders)
posted by Pat | 12:24 PM
